House Democrats’ hold on the articles of impeachment remained locked on Wednesday, even as much of the caucus’ attention was diverted to the issue of Iran.
Multiple members told reporters that the issue of impeachment didn’t even come up in Wednesday’s weekly caucus-wide meeting. Rather, much of the Democrats’ energy appears to be focused on nailing down their strategy for the war powers resolution in light of Tuesday night’s attack on a U.S. military base in Iraq.
The standoff between Senate Republicans and House Democrats over the two articles of impeachment — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — has stretched out for more than 20 days.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refuses to send over the two articles of impeachment until Republicans lay out their procedures for a fair trial.
In the Senate, a handful of Democrats are breaking off from the pack and suggesting it’s time for the House to deliver the articles so the trial can move on.
House Democrats, however, are sticking together on the strategy and messaging.
SEE ALSO: Senate Democrats break with Pelosi, want articles of impeachment
“McConnell can do whatever he gets 51 votes to do, but we need to be informed as to what the process is going to be so we can respond appropriately,” Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer told reporters.
Even Reps. Sean Patrick Maloney, New York Democrat, and Tom Malinowski, New Jersey Democrat — two impeachment supporters from tough districts — are supporting the speaker’s delay play.
“I think the House has done its constitutional duty, and the Senate should do theirs,” Mr. Maloney said. “I think she’s done a great job, she doesn’t need any help from me.”
During the 1999 trial of former President Bill Clinton, House prosecutors and White House defense presented their cases and senators posed questions before deciding whether or not to hear from witnesses. The process was agreed to unanimously.
Despite the Republicans’ proposal of sticking to that precedent, some Democrats say they need to see it in writing in the form of a resolution. Others say there’s no deal if there isn’t a guarantee that additional witnesses will testify.
“The entire context is so dramatically different,” Rep. Dan Kildee said Tuesday. “The Ken Starr investigation, all the work leading up to the impeachment of Clinton was so dramatically different that there’s not really apples to apples comparison. The fact is in front of us right now we have witnesses that have information that is relevant to the determination that the Senate is going to have to make.”
SEE ALSO: Democrats appear to delay vote challenging Trump’s war powers after Iran strike
Democrats’ demands have been bolstered by former National Security Adviser John R. Bolton’s announcement that he would be willing to testify in the Senate trial.
He’s believed to have first-hand knowledge of the administration’s efforts to pursue investigations of Mr. Trump’s political rival, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, and allegations of Ukrainian election interference in 2016.
As for whether or not the House will pursue Mr. Bolton’s testimony independently from the Senate, as some Republicans in the other chamber have suggested, Mr. Hoyer said it’s “not an option we’re pursuing at this point in time.”
• Gabriella Muñoz can be reached at gmunoz@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.